Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Wait ... so is it your contention then that she had eyes on him since 2003, and that in 2012, seeing his advancement and anticipating that someday in the future he might one day be nominated to the Supreme court, she found a therapist and tricked her husband and the therapist into thinking these events with Kavanaugh happened in high school. Setting up a credible background so that one day, if he ever did get nominated or too close to confirmation, she would have this allegation available to toss out at the last minute in the hopes it would stop his confirmation ... ??

    Jim
    Er, what? No. My contention is that, if this was so traumatic, it should've triggered something when he first came to national attention. It didn't.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
      Wait ... so is it your contention then that she had eyes on him since 2003, and that in 2012, seeing his advancement and anticipating that someday in the future he might one day be nominated to the Supreme court, she found a therapist and tricked her husband and the therapist into thinking these events with Kavanaugh happened in high school. Setting up a credible background so that one day, if he ever did get nominated or too close to confirmation, she would have this allegation available to toss out at the last minute in the hopes it would stop his confirmation ... ??

      Jim
      * OBP's theory could be considered I suppose.

      Source: The Washington Post

      He [i.e. Ford's husband sic] said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

      © Copyright Original Source

      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxmixmuddle View Post
        * OBP's theory could be considered I suppose.

        Source: The Washington Post

        He [i.e. Ford's husband sic] said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

        © Copyright Original Source

        Isn't that a convenient recollection. Except that according to the hard evidence -- in this case, the therapist's notes -- Ford implied that she was assaulted by four guys and didn't give any names. Yet we're supposed to believe she had this very specific concern despite there being nothing in 2012 to suggest that Kavanaugh would be a contender for justice of the SC.

        Like I said, Ford's story has a distinct odor of "making it up as she goes".
        Last edited by Mountain Man; 09-22-2018, 04:00 PM.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          You don't recall Miguel Estrada?
          Sorry, I should have specified the only one I recall in recent years getting media coverage. My point was the rarity for anyone to get media coverage to the point that anyone not actively following the appointment process in general would have heard any names.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
            Sorry, I should have specified the only one I recall in recent years getting media coverage.
            Yet Kavanaugh DID get media coverage.
            My point was the rarity for anyone to get media coverage to the point that anyone not actively following the appointment process in general would have heard any names.
            She went to a school whose students frequently interacted with students from the school he went to; even if there had been no traumatic experience with him, I'd expect her to have twigged to the name the first time around. His confirmation back then was a near thing, and even then the Democrats were pulling out all the stops to derail nominees. I wasn't even remotely following the appointment process back then, and I knew of several nominees being stonewalled - without knowing any of them from Adam.

            ETA: That she allegedly knew of Kavanaugh as a federal judge in 2012 puts paid to the theory that she wasn't aware back then; judges tend to be much more low-profile once they're confirmed.
            Last edited by One Bad Pig; 09-22-2018, 05:20 PM.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              At what point is it going to sink in that this is not in the FBI's purview? Feinstein asked them to investigate and they told her no. As a foreigner I can't expect you to know that this does not fall under their jurisdiction but it is unconscionable that so many liberal politicians continue to demand what they full well know (and if at one point they didn't they like you have been repeatedly informed since then) is not something they would investigate. This is what the local authorities are for. The politicians are deliberately playing on the public at large's ignorance about this. That is incredibly dishonest.

              All the FBI could do, even when making a standard background check, is ask the locals to investigate (unless federal laws were broken). But nobody knows, including Ford, what local authorities to ask. She thinks it might have been in Montgomery County and it might have been some time during the summer of 1982 (she's not even sure about that). With so little to go on all anyone can do at this point is file a report. That is it.
              It is standard procedure for the FBI to do background checks on potential candidates for the judiciary. Kavanaugh has already had six prior to his various appointments over the years. All that's required it a further background check in the light of the additional information being provided by professor Ford. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the importance of and the life-time tenure of the SCOTUS justices is is a reasonable ask. Kavanaugh himself should welcome it in order to clear his name.

              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

              This is entirely politically motivated.
              Oh say not so...you mean like Merrick Garland?

              Last edited by Tassman; 09-22-2018, 08:31 PM.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassmoron View Post
                Given the seriousness of the allegations...
                That's right, facts don't matter, just "the seriousness of the allegations".
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Source: Committee contacts Ford's friend about party; 'she has no recollection' of it, lawyer says

                  CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.

                  "I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article," a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.

                  On Saturday night, her lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee.

                  "Simply put," Walsh said, "Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford."

                  The lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford's.

                  [...]

                  Keyser is the latest person alleged to be at the party to say she has no recollection of it.

                  https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/polit...ion/index.html

                  © Copyright Original Source


                  So that's four people identified by Ford who have all denied any knowledge of the incident in question.

                  Why is the Senate even treating this like a plausible accusation at this point? The Republican party is pathetic.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    It is standard procedure for the FBI to do background checks on potential candidates for the judiciary. Kavanaugh has already had six prior to his various appointments over the years. All that's required it a further background check in the light of the additional information being provided by professor Ford. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the importance of and the life-time tenure of the SCOTUS justices is is a reasonable ask. Kavanaugh himself should welcome it in order to clear his name.
                    Again since no federal laws were alleged to be violated they would simply recommend turning any further investigation over to the local authorities. This is why they have already declined to get involved in this. So you can stop beating this dead horse now.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      Again since no federal laws were alleged to be violated they would simply recommend turning any further investigation over to the local authorities. This is why they have already declined to get involved in this. So you can stop beating this dead horse now.
                      An FBI investigation re court appointments is standard procedure: “Candidate finalists also undergo a confidential background investigation by the FBI and an independent evaluation by a committee of the American Bar Association”.

                      https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43762.pdf

                      Without one what we are left in this instance is a welter of vague information — and misinformation — that does more harm than good. Dr Ford’s case has been surrounded by rumours, conspiracy theories, lies and outrageous hearsay on social media...including such forums as TWeb.
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        [ATTACH=CONFIG]31390[/ATTACH]
                        Attached Files

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          There's no dead horse to be flogged. You are being as obstructive as Grassley and co. Why, when there remain so many unknowns, rumours, conspiracy theories, lies and outrageous hearsay floating around? Senate Democrats aren’t asking for a criminal investigation. They merely want the FBI to reopen Kavanaugh’s background check. What with the new information on hand from Dr Ford it warrants further investigation. There’s nothing to stop the FBI from reopening or adding to their background check. Or, perhaps that exactly want you don’t want.
                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • I still ask, what's wrong with believing that the rape probably took place, but also at the same time being honest about the impossibility of convicting Kavanaugh?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              No they just forget all the pertinent details such as
                              • where it took place
                              • when it took place
                              • how you got to this place
                              • if you went to this place with others
                              • if the alleged assailants followed you upstairs or were already waiting
                              • the number of the alleged assailants
                              • how you got home
                              This is the one part of this case I don't understand, and where I agree with you guys. I think its fair game for Garland to tell that Kavanaugh raped her. I don't think she needs any justification for time or place for that. But to start a hearing and all sorts of other things, when there's no snowballs chance in hell of convicting Kavanaugh of any of it, that's a bit far out.

                              And you never, ever tell a single soul. Not the authorities, not a school counselor, not a classmate, not your bff, not a sibling or other relative.

                              This has all the ear marks of a false memory.
                              I'm curious, do you believe that the majority of women who have been raped, go to the authorities? And that the authorities listen to them?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                                I still ask, what's wrong with believing that the rape probably took place, but also at the same time being honest about the impossibility of convicting Kavanaugh?
                                Nothing, as long as you have sufficient evidence for that belief to be justified.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                165 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                383 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X